Judges make mistakes, but we must keep faith in court system

The judicial system in the United States is a lonely warrior standing between the people and chaos and violence, and yet this talisman is under unprecedented attack.

Early societies dealt with perceived violations of their norms with physical violence and vicious retribution. Vigilante groups attacked and often killed the perpetrators. Then came the judicial process to rescue all of us from this bloody chaos.

This system requires justice to be unbiased. The traditional image of justice is of a robe-clad woman with scales in her hand and, most importantly, wearing a blindfold. The dream is of perfect justice in the Platonic sense: in the belief that we can achieve as human beings this perfect balance.

When it fails, when the balance is perceived to be incorrectly applied, the public rises in anguish. And the past months have seen a rising crescendo of such outcries.

The problem is centered on the obvious fact that (gasp) judges are human beings who bring to the bench their own views and upbringings.

Phil Fullerton, retired lawyer

The most recent is the distress over the light sentence of six months given by a Santa Clara Superior Court judge to a convicted Stanford student and athlete after he was found guilty of a sex crime.

Donald Trump has accused a federal judge of being biased against him in civil litigation involving Trump University. He claims that the judge’s Mexican heritage led him inevitably to rulings against Trump due to Trump’s announced position of building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico and having them pay for it.

We have seen the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, whose central thesis is that the system and its enforcers, the law enforcement community, are tilted against black citizens.

In this context we have seen a return to violence as a remedy in places like Ferguson, Mo., and in earlier years, to places as diverse as Watts, South Central Los Angeles and Detroit. And similarly in an unreformed South, of lynchings of alleged black offenders.

Our highest tribunal, the Supreme Court, is perceived as torn between liberal and conservative wings, and the next appointment to break a court evenly divided between these two wings is seen as critically important for widely ranging issues from abortion to medical care.

As a trial attorney in the Valley, I knew each judge’s proclivities. Some were insurance defense attorneys who subconsciously favored defendants in civil injury law suits. One judge had a wild aversion to alcohol and the labeling of a litigant as a drinker cast him in an unfavorable light.

Phil Fullerton

These developments are alarming, for they cast doubt on the very foundations of our society. And the problem is centered on the obvious fact that (gasp) judges are human beings who bring to the bench their own views and upbringings.

As a trial attorney in the Valley, I knew each judge’s proclivities. Some were insurance defense attorneys who subconsciously favored defendants in civil injury law suits. One judge had a wild aversion to alcohol and the labeling of a litigant as a drinker cast him in an unfavorable light.

Associate Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer spoke to an alumni gathering at my alma mater, Stanford University, and honestly commented on Bush v. Gore, a 5-4 decision that put George W. Bush into the presidency, that he tried his best but deep in his heart wasn’t sure that he was unbiased. This was an amazing and honest statement.

And I think that is the first step in preserving our system. We must only demand that our judiciary try honestly so that in their hearts and minds they are doing the best they can. Tethered to humanity, we can ask no more of each person.

Yet, of course, this is not enough. In those areas that one feels aggrieved, our system has many safety valves. Unfavorable decisions can be changed by appeal, legislatively or constitutionally. Many judges can be recalled. And the right to peaceful protest is guaranteed and is a legitimate outlet for disagreement. The public should feel free to voice its profound concerns with our system.

Yet, as imperfect as our judicial system is, we must not lose faith in it. We must support it because it alone stands between us and chaos, between liberty and tyranny. Speak up peacefully if you wish, but never join the ranks of those willing to cast aside one of the greatest achievements of the United States: the dream of equal justice for all.

Phil Fullerton of Fresno is a retired lawyer. Email him at Puyricard8@sbcglobal.net.